-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
M3 SR+ failed battery replaced under warranty, with a very used pack
- Thread starter carbonzhp
- Start date
I would never expect to be made "more than whole" in situations like this, even though I have before - I just considered it a lucky bonus.
I saw this for years on the 2017-2019 Honda Ridgeline that had a 6-speed transmission with an unusually high failure rate. Owners would get remanufactured transmissions under warranty and get upset that they didn't get new ones.
It's as if some people expect to be compensated for their inconvenience by being given a product better than the one that failed. I guess I see the psychology in that, but that's not how warranties work.
johnny_cakes
Member
The Max capacity when new value of 55.4 kWh in your report seems to be off. I have the same vehicle (2019 M3 SR+) and the max capacity is 52.5 kWh according to @AlanSubie4Life. My battery capacity now is slightly less than your new one (45 kWh capacity instead of 45.5 kWh) and the degradation is 14.2%. Still not great, but not nearly as bad as the 20.8% reported by Teslogic. I also get the same rated range at 100% SoC (205 miles). So I don't think your battery has degraded nearly as much as you think.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yes, 55.4kWh is not correct. There should be plenty of SMT read screen captures out there showing Full Pack When New value (which is about 52.5kWh).
Not sure how Teslogic is coming up with this info, though. It seemed to get it right the first time with the old pack (52.4kWh). If it's reading this 55.4kWh from the pack, that's difficult to explain (however that value does not represent anything physical, it's just a value assigned to the pack that doesn't guarantee where the pack started).
johnny_cakes
Member
Maybe the new pack is one from a newer vehicle and therefore higher original capacity then the battery it replaced?
Yep.
Seems to be very common with all aftermarket apps not to know and to instead wildly guess the original capacity.
From my kept in head statistics, by mental arithmetic, it seem to be a at least 80-90% probability that you get a original capacity thats far off the real one.
In this case, we can hope that the app could calculate the range ( ~ capacity) good enough to be able to make a good compare between before and after.
Looks like the replacement batt is in line eith the warranty.
davewill
Active Member
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
(Yes, you are probably correct.)
Again, first question is how Teslogic got this value. It looks like it accessed CAN bus so in theory should be reading straight from pack. (Looked at Teslogic website and it looks similar to SMT.)
However, I have no idea. It is odd, but again it does not really mean anything since this value can probably be set arbitrarily by Tesla. Just a curiosity. Not reflective of capacity loss.
* I need to review this. I thought that the 2170L pack had FPWN of 53.5kWh but now I am thinking it was similar to the LFP pack…Will do some looking at old posts. I lose track.
Here we go:
Why is home charging only 32 amps on SR when supercharging is so much faster?
So seems most likely this is a 2170L pack (or at least has that FPWN value applied). I was wrong with above.
55.4kWh is FPWN for 2170L pack. Though they typically started closer to around 53.5kWh, or at least that was the degradation threshold.
55.1kWh is FPWN for LFP (the temporary short-term LFP pack). Hence my confusion.
Probably it actually is a 2170L pack, but hard to say whether they overrode the hard-coded value or not. Probably is just 2170L, though.
Last edited:
However, in some cases, the warranty (or recall) replacement part was a better one, because the vehicle company chose to make an improved design that had a lower failure rate than one with a high failure rate, or because a newer variant in production that was better was a drop-in replacement for the old one.I saw this for years on the 2017-2019 Honda Ridgeline that had a 6-speed transmission with an unusually high failure rate. Owners would get remanufactured transmissions under warranty and get upset that they didn't get new ones.
It's as if some people expect to be compensated for their inconvenience by being given a product better than the one that failed. I guess I see the psychology in that, but that's not how warranties work
Examples of the former include various parts in early 2000s Volkswagens (window regulator clips, mass airflow sensors, brake lamp switches, hazard / turn signal flashers, etc.). An example of the latter was the 2017-2019 Chevrolet Bolt batteries that were recalled due to some having defects that could cause fires. The replacements were of a newer type that had slightly higher capacity, probably because it made no sense to restart production of the older variant that probably cost more anyway.
So it is possible that if Honda had determined the cause of high rates of failure in the Ridgeline transmission, the remanufactured warranty replacement many have had the weak parts replaced by more robust ones.
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
OP is very obviously using “dealership” colloquially to mean the Tesla service center.
I didnt assume. I just read the very 1st sentence of the thread.
I will charge when it hits 50%, used to be 90% (above 400km) and stop, then head back home, usually it went back to 80 when arrive home.
I have home office and other cars, but keep to drive at least 2-3 times a week. Just email Tesla CS, see if they will remote diagnose my car first.
I have home office and other cars, but keep to drive at least 2-3 times a week. Just email Tesla CS, see if they will remote diagnose my car first.
I would never expect to be made "more than whole" in situations like this, even though I have before - I just considered it a lucky bonus.
I saw this for years on the 2017-2019 Honda Ridgeline that had a 6-speed transmission with an unusually high failure rate. Owners would get remanufactured transmissions under warranty and get upset that they didn't get new ones.
It's as if some people expect to be compensated for their inconvenience by being given a product better than the one that failed. I guess I see the psychology in that, but that's not how warranties work.
People expect a new part because if they just put in the the exact used part that has the same flaw, then all that does is push out the problem out past the warranty period on purpose, not "fix" the issue.
Similar threads
